A YOUNG driver says she is lucky to be alive after her car plunged 20 feet down a hill after clipping a pothole.

And now trainee hairdresser Christie Councer is calling on Gloucestershire County Council to repair potholes on stretches of road which are known to be dangerous.

Christie was travelling along the A4173 from her home in Stroud to Gloucester College when the incident, which sent her car spinning out of control, occurred near to the junction with Styles Lane at around 10am on Monday, January 27.

The 19-year-old, who was travelling between 35 and 40mph, said she only spotted the pothole at the last minute and tried to steer around it but caught it and ended up careering across the road and into the opposite lane.

After bouncing off the kerb on the other side of the road, she was sent spinning back into the left-hand lane.

She then crashed sideways through a wooden fence and collided with a tree which was snapped in half by the full force of the car’s impact.

The ex-Archway pupil was showered with broken glass but luckily escaped with only cuts and bruises.

She said her injuries could have been far worse if a hedgerow hadn’t prevented her car from tumbling further down the embankment.

Promoted stories

Christie, who works at Blushes in Gloucester, said the pothole, which appeared to have been circled with white paint by Gloucestershire Highways, should have been repaired straight away rather than simply marked and left.

“At the very least the council should have put some signs up to alert drivers to the pothole,” she said.

“They knew it was there because they had painted around it. If they had repaired it at the earliest possible opportunity none of this would have happened.

“I understand it’s difficult to repair all the potholes but it’s such a dangerous stretch of road, they should have repaired it immediately because you couldn’t see the paint until you were on top of it.”

After Christie’s car had come to a standstill four builders working nearby rushed to her assistance.

Between them, they were able to force open the driver’s side door and release the shaken teenager from inside to await the police, fire and ambulance crews who all attended the scene.

She was fitted with a neck brace, put on a stretcher and taken to Gloucestershire Royal Hospital where she received painkillers and a stitch for a gash in her head.

“I was so lucky, it really could have been a lot worse,” said Christie who is still suffering from a suspected concussion.

She would like to thank the builders and emergency service workers who came to her rescue.

Share article

Recent severe winters have caused major problems with potholes throughout the county. Gloucestershire County Council currently fixes around 50,000 a year and expects to spend £24 million in 2014 mending and resurfacing roads.

A GCC spokesman said: “Our sympathies are with the driver involved in this accident. Our busiest roads like the A4173 are inspected at least every month and across the county our priority is to fix unsafe potholes immediately, while smaller potholes are programmed to be repaired within 28 days – in line with the national guidelines.”

Promoted Stories

Comments (38)

This is truly terrible! I frequently use the A46/A4173 to see my friends and the pot holes on both stretches of road is abysmal. Coming towards Stroud for example, there is one massive pothole that is near the central line, just after the corner before Painswick Valley car sales. There is I think 2 or 3 very close to one another coming the opposite way, then the first corner or two going up from Pitchcombe towards Edge, there is some very damaged road there as well. The council really need to sort this stretch of road out. Can't imagine how many cars have been damaged due to this roads pot holes and yes some maybe circled with white paint, but in the rain and headlights glaring from the shiny road surface, it's to late to do anything about it. I know just about where these potholes are and can to a degree avoid them. But for those new to the road or unaware of their exact location, this may turn fatal.

This is truly terrible! I frequently use the A46/A4173 to see my friends and the pot holes on both stretches of road is abysmal. Coming towards Stroud for example, there is one massive pothole that is near the central line, just after the corner before Painswick Valley car sales. There is I think 2 or 3 very close to one another coming the opposite way, then the first corner or two going up from Pitchcombe towards Edge, there is some very damaged road there as well.
The council really need to sort this stretch of road out. Can't imagine how many cars have been damaged due to this roads pot holes and yes some maybe circled with white paint, but in the rain and headlights glaring from the shiny road surface, it's to late to do anything about it. I know just about where these potholes are and can to a degree avoid them. But for those new to the road or unaware of their exact location, this may turn fatal.GDW1982

This is truly terrible! I frequently use the A46/A4173 to see my friends and the pot holes on both stretches of road is abysmal. Coming towards Stroud for example, there is one massive pothole that is near the central line, just after the corner before Painswick Valley car sales. There is I think 2 or 3 very close to one another coming the opposite way, then the first corner or two going up from Pitchcombe towards Edge, there is some very damaged road there as well. The council really need to sort this stretch of road out. Can't imagine how many cars have been damaged due to this roads pot holes and yes some maybe circled with white paint, but in the rain and headlights glaring from the shiny road surface, it's to late to do anything about it. I know just about where these potholes are and can to a degree avoid them. But for those new to the road or unaware of their exact location, this may turn fatal.

Score: 8

tryptych says...9:30pm Wed 5 Feb 14

The whole Stroud area is strewn with dangerous holes, and nothing seems to be being done about it. I have had to replace all four tyres and shock absorbers this year. It is shear luck this poor girl wasn't killed, and I see it only as a matter of time before there is a fatality due to the incompetence of the councils to fix the roads.

The whole Stroud area is strewn with dangerous holes, and nothing seems to be being done about it. I have had to replace all four tyres and shock absorbers this year. It is shear luck this poor girl wasn't killed, and I see it only as a matter of time before there is a fatality due to the incompetence of the councils to fix the roads.tryptych

The whole Stroud area is strewn with dangerous holes, and nothing seems to be being done about it. I have had to replace all four tyres and shock absorbers this year. It is shear luck this poor girl wasn't killed, and I see it only as a matter of time before there is a fatality due to the incompetence of the councils to fix the roads.

Score: 5

kjag23 says...2:14pm Thu 6 Feb 14

Whilst I do sympathise with this girl as the condition of almost all roads in the area are appalling, if you know the road and its condition you should be traveling at a speed where having to swerve to avoid a pothole doesn't send you flying off the road...

Whilst I do sympathise with this girl as the condition of almost all roads in the area are appalling, if you know the road and its condition you should be traveling at a speed where having to swerve to avoid a pothole doesn't send you flying off the road...kjag23

Whilst I do sympathise with this girl as the condition of almost all roads in the area are appalling, if you know the road and its condition you should be traveling at a speed where having to swerve to avoid a pothole doesn't send you flying off the road...

Score: 18

zer()cool says...4:35am Fri 7 Feb 14

inexperienced driver syndrome, I suspect she was not traveling at a safe speed for the environment, you wouldn't travel at such speed if there was icy conditions would you? same applies to uneven road surfaces, also seems she over compensated with steering not taking into consideration the speed she was going,how could you possibly hit a kerb in the opposite lane, by avoiding a pothole unless it was the width of the whole lane you were in, & even then it would have to span partially the other lane too?... if she drove that way to work every day, she should of been aware of the state of the road, my guess is that she was late for work initially, this is why insurance premiums are at an all time high, hope she recovers ok though

inexperienced driver syndrome, I suspect she was not traveling at a safe speed for the environment, you wouldn't travel at such speed if there was icy conditions would you? same applies to uneven road surfaces, also seems she over compensated with steering not taking into consideration the speed she was going,how could you possibly hit a kerb in the opposite lane, by avoiding a pothole unless it was the width of the whole lane you were in, & even then it would have to span partially the other lane too?... if she drove that way to work every day, she should of been aware of the state of the road, my guess is that she was late for work initially, this is why insurance premiums are at an all time high, hope she recovers ok thoughzer()cool

inexperienced driver syndrome, I suspect she was not traveling at a safe speed for the environment, you wouldn't travel at such speed if there was icy conditions would you? same applies to uneven road surfaces, also seems she over compensated with steering not taking into consideration the speed she was going,how could you possibly hit a kerb in the opposite lane, by avoiding a pothole unless it was the width of the whole lane you were in, & even then it would have to span partially the other lane too?... if she drove that way to work every day, she should of been aware of the state of the road, my guess is that she was late for work initially, this is why insurance premiums are at an all time high, hope she recovers ok though

Score: 11

dimreepr says...6:22pm Fri 7 Feb 14

ALL of the above statements seem to put the blame for this ACCIDENT squarely on the shoulders of the victim and is a perfect example of assumption. The term ‘accident’ should be taken literally, in cases such as this, and blame should be apportioned to the ‘MOST’ responsible i.e. those responsible for highway maintenance, the motorist pays dearly for a basic infrastructure, one that should be trustworthy and not one that mimics a third world country.

ALL of the above statements seem to put the blame for this ACCIDENT squarely on the shoulders of the victim and is a perfect example of assumption. The term ‘accident’ should be taken literally, in cases such as this, and blame should be apportioned to the ‘MOST’ responsible i.e. those responsible for highway maintenance, the motorist pays dearly for a basic infrastructure, one that should be trustworthy and not one that mimics a third world country.dimreepr

ALL of the above statements seem to put the blame for this ACCIDENT squarely on the shoulders of the victim and is a perfect example of assumption. The term ‘accident’ should be taken literally, in cases such as this, and blame should be apportioned to the ‘MOST’ responsible i.e. those responsible for highway maintenance, the motorist pays dearly for a basic infrastructure, one that should be trustworthy and not one that mimics a third world country.

Score: -8

dimreepr says...6:26pm Fri 7 Feb 14

Edit/ My apologies to the first two posts, for all, should have read the last two.

Edit/ My apologies to the first two posts, for all, should have read the last two.dimreepr

Edit/ My apologies to the first two posts, for all, should have read the last two.

Score: 1

Salendine says...10:57am Sat 8 Feb 14

I guess it wouldn't make good headlines, but after any accident you should always examine what you could have done differently. Most accidents, even when as dim states someone else is most responsible, could have been avoided by the one least responsible. I used to race motorbikes, which involved crashing often. After each crash you always thought about what you could have done differently. We absolutely shouldn't be blaming the young lass. Clearly inexperienced as we all were at some point. She should just take time to reflect on what she could have done differently. SNJ could certainly have been more responsible and talked about that aspect.

I guess it wouldn't make good headlines, but after any accident you should always examine what you could have done differently. Most accidents, even when as dim states someone else is most responsible, could have been avoided by the one least responsible. I used to race motorbikes, which involved crashing often. After each crash you always thought about what you could have done differently.
We absolutely shouldn't be blaming the young lass. Clearly inexperienced as we all were at some point. She should just take time to reflect on what she could have done differently. SNJ could certainly have been more responsible and talked about that aspect.Salendine

I guess it wouldn't make good headlines, but after any accident you should always examine what you could have done differently. Most accidents, even when as dim states someone else is most responsible, could have been avoided by the one least responsible. I used to race motorbikes, which involved crashing often. After each crash you always thought about what you could have done differently. We absolutely shouldn't be blaming the young lass. Clearly inexperienced as we all were at some point. She should just take time to reflect on what she could have done differently. SNJ could certainly have been more responsible and talked about that aspect.

Score: -6

TigerTigerBurningBright says...11:48am Sun 9 Feb 14

Since the motorist does not pay for a basic infrastructure, that argument is null. Taxation is not hypothecated. If it were we'd have all sorts of shenanigans with people shouting loudly "I paid for that!" when they did nothing of the sort, they paid into the general tax pot and the general tax pot is used to fund all services. Now, to the crash above. The Highway Code is explicit. You need to drive at a speed at which you can stop in the distance you can see to be clear. Sadly almost all drivers forget large chunks of the information they learnt to pass the test with. Then they wonder why things go wrong.

Since the motorist does not pay for a basic infrastructure, that argument is null. Taxation is not hypothecated. If it were we'd have all sorts of shenanigans with people shouting loudly "I paid for that!" when they did nothing of the sort, they paid into the general tax pot and the general tax pot is used to fund all services.
Now, to the crash above. The Highway Code is explicit. You need to drive at a speed at which you can stop in the distance you can see to be clear. Sadly almost all drivers forget large chunks of the information they learnt to pass the test with. Then they wonder why things go wrong.TigerTigerBurningBright

Since the motorist does not pay for a basic infrastructure, that argument is null. Taxation is not hypothecated. If it were we'd have all sorts of shenanigans with people shouting loudly "I paid for that!" when they did nothing of the sort, they paid into the general tax pot and the general tax pot is used to fund all services. Now, to the crash above. The Highway Code is explicit. You need to drive at a speed at which you can stop in the distance you can see to be clear. Sadly almost all drivers forget large chunks of the information they learnt to pass the test with. Then they wonder why things go wrong.

Score: 6

dimreepr says...12:24pm Sun 9 Feb 14

“Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) (also known as vehicle tax, car tax and road tax), is a tax that is levied as an excise duty and which must be paid for most types of vehicle which are to be used (or parked) on the public roads in the United Kingdom.” And “This excise duty was ring-fenced (earmarked) for road construction and was paid directly into a special Road Fund.” Also, there is no reason to assume, from the above description that the Highway Code wasn’t strictly adhered to.

“Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) (also known as vehicle tax, car tax and road tax), is a tax that is levied as an excise duty and which must be paid for most types of vehicle which are to be used (or parked) on the public roads in the United Kingdom.”
And
“This excise duty was ring-fenced (earmarked) for road construction and was paid directly into a special Road Fund.”
Also, there is no reason to assume, from the above description that the Highway Code wasn’t strictly adhered to.dimreepr

“Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) (also known as vehicle tax, car tax and road tax), is a tax that is levied as an excise duty and which must be paid for most types of vehicle which are to be used (or parked) on the public roads in the United Kingdom.” And “This excise duty was ring-fenced (earmarked) for road construction and was paid directly into a special Road Fund.” Also, there is no reason to assume, from the above description that the Highway Code wasn’t strictly adhered to.

Score: -5

TigerTigerBurningBright says...12:34pm Sun 9 Feb 14

Oh, you naughty man - selectively quoting Wikipedia. "This excise duty was ring-fenced (earmarked) for road construction and was paid directly into a special Road Fund from 1920 until 1937 after which it was treated as general taxation." At least we know now to thoroughly check all your sources, dim.

Oh, you naughty man - selectively quoting Wikipedia.
"This excise duty was ring-fenced (earmarked) for road construction and was paid directly into a special Road Fund from 1920 until 1937 after which it was treated as general taxation."
At least we know now to thoroughly check all your sources, dim.TigerTigerBurningBright

Oh, you naughty man - selectively quoting Wikipedia. "This excise duty was ring-fenced (earmarked) for road construction and was paid directly into a special Road Fund from 1920 until 1937 after which it was treated as general taxation." At least we know now to thoroughly check all your sources, dim.

Score: 8

TigerTigerBurningBright says...12:59pm Sun 9 Feb 14

dim, You want some Highway code? "125 The speed limit is the absolute maximum and does not mean it is safe to drive at that speed irrespective of conditions. Driving at speeds too fast for the road and traffic conditions is dangerous. You should always reduce your speed when the road layout or condition presents hazards, such as bends sharing the road with pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders, particularly children, and motorcyclists weather conditions make it safer to do so driving at night as it is more difficult to see other road users." "126 Stopping Distances. Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear. You should" "146 Adapt your driving to the appropriate type and condition of road you are on. In particular do not treat speed limits as a target. It is often not appropriate or safe to drive at the maximum speed limit take the road and traffic conditions into account. Be prepared for unexpected or difficult situations, for example, the road being blocked beyond a blind bend. Be prepared to adjust your speed as a precaution"

dim, You want some Highway code?
"125
The speed limit is the absolute maximum and does not mean it is safe to drive at that speed irrespective of conditions. Driving at speeds too fast for the road and traffic conditions is dangerous. You should always reduce your speed when the road layout or condition presents hazards, such as bends sharing the road with pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders, particularly children, and motorcyclists weather conditions make it safer to do so driving at night as it is more difficult to see other road users."
"126
Stopping Distances. Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear. You should"
"146
Adapt your driving to the appropriate type and condition of road you are on. In particular
do not treat speed limits as a target. It is often not appropriate or safe to drive at the maximum speed limit take the road and traffic conditions into account. Be prepared for unexpected or difficult situations, for example, the road being blocked beyond a blind bend. Be prepared to adjust your speed as a precaution"TigerTigerBurningBright

dim, You want some Highway code? "125 The speed limit is the absolute maximum and does not mean it is safe to drive at that speed irrespective of conditions. Driving at speeds too fast for the road and traffic conditions is dangerous. You should always reduce your speed when the road layout or condition presents hazards, such as bends sharing the road with pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders, particularly children, and motorcyclists weather conditions make it safer to do so driving at night as it is more difficult to see other road users." "126 Stopping Distances. Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear. You should" "146 Adapt your driving to the appropriate type and condition of road you are on. In particular do not treat speed limits as a target. It is often not appropriate or safe to drive at the maximum speed limit take the road and traffic conditions into account. Be prepared for unexpected or difficult situations, for example, the road being blocked beyond a blind bend. Be prepared to adjust your speed as a precaution"

Score: 6

dimreepr says...1:09pm Sun 9 Feb 14

TigerTigerBurningBri ght wrote…

Oh, you naughty man - selectively quoting Wikipedia. "This excise duty was ring-fenced (earmarked) for road construction and was paid directly into a special Road Fund from 1920 until 1937 after which it was treated as general taxation." At least we know now to thoroughly check all your sources, dim.

I made no claims and provided no source because it was merely to point out two specifics of VED. 1 This tax is unique, in that, it was originally designed to raise funds to build infrastructure (specifically roads) directly from its users; yes, the tax is now treated as part of the pot, but that wasn’t the point. 2 It’s also unique, in that, it still directly relates to roads “must be paid for most types of vehicle which are to be used (or parked) on the public roads” so if the roads disintegrate no tax to collect. The interconnectedness of this particular tax means it’s perfectly legitimate to argue the current infrastructure should be maintained from its proceeds.

[quote][p][bold]TigerTigerBurningBri
ght[/bold] wrote:
Oh, you naughty man - selectively quoting Wikipedia.
"This excise duty was ring-fenced (earmarked) for road construction and was paid directly into a special Road Fund from 1920 until 1937 after which it was treated as general taxation."
At least we know now to thoroughly check all your sources, dim.[/p][/quote]I made no claims and provided no source because it was merely to point out two specifics of VED.
1 This tax is unique, in that, it was originally designed to raise funds to build infrastructure (specifically roads) directly from its users; yes, the tax is now treated as part of the pot, but that wasn’t the point.
2 It’s also unique, in that, it still directly relates to roads “must be paid for most types of vehicle which are to be used (or parked) on the public roads” so if the roads disintegrate no tax to collect.
The interconnectedness of this particular tax means it’s perfectly legitimate to argue the current infrastructure should be maintained from its proceeds.dimreepr

TigerTigerBurningBri ght wrote…

Oh, you naughty man - selectively quoting Wikipedia. "This excise duty was ring-fenced (earmarked) for road construction and was paid directly into a special Road Fund from 1920 until 1937 after which it was treated as general taxation." At least we know now to thoroughly check all your sources, dim.

I made no claims and provided no source because it was merely to point out two specifics of VED. 1 This tax is unique, in that, it was originally designed to raise funds to build infrastructure (specifically roads) directly from its users; yes, the tax is now treated as part of the pot, but that wasn’t the point. 2 It’s also unique, in that, it still directly relates to roads “must be paid for most types of vehicle which are to be used (or parked) on the public roads” so if the roads disintegrate no tax to collect. The interconnectedness of this particular tax means it’s perfectly legitimate to argue the current infrastructure should be maintained from its proceeds.

Score: -6

dimreepr says...1:11pm Sun 9 Feb 14

TigerTigerBurningBri ght wrote…

dim, You want some Highway code? "125 The speed limit is the absolute maximum and does not mean it is safe to drive at that speed irrespective of conditions. Driving at speeds too fast for the road and traffic conditions is dangerous. You should always reduce your speed when the road layout or condition presents hazards, such as bends sharing the road with pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders, particularly children, and motorcyclists weather conditions make it safer to do so driving at night as it is more difficult to see other road users." "126 Stopping Distances. Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear. You should" "146 Adapt your driving to the appropriate type and condition of road you are on. In particular do not treat speed limits as a target. It is often not appropriate or safe to drive at the maximum speed limit take the road and traffic conditions into account. Be prepared for unexpected or difficult situations, for example, the road being blocked beyond a blind bend. Be prepared to adjust your speed as a precaution"

How does this answer my point? You still have no reason to assume the above was true of this girl.

[quote][p][bold]TigerTigerBurningBri
ght[/bold] wrote:
dim, You want some Highway code?
"125
The speed limit is the absolute maximum and does not mean it is safe to drive at that speed irrespective of conditions. Driving at speeds too fast for the road and traffic conditions is dangerous. You should always reduce your speed when the road layout or condition presents hazards, such as bends sharing the road with pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders, particularly children, and motorcyclists weather conditions make it safer to do so driving at night as it is more difficult to see other road users."
"126
Stopping Distances. Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear. You should"
"146
Adapt your driving to the appropriate type and condition of road you are on. In particular
do not treat speed limits as a target. It is often not appropriate or safe to drive at the maximum speed limit take the road and traffic conditions into account. Be prepared for unexpected or difficult situations, for example, the road being blocked beyond a blind bend. Be prepared to adjust your speed as a precaution"[/p][/quote]How does this answer my point? You still have no reason to assume the above was true of this girl.dimreepr

TigerTigerBurningBri ght wrote…

dim, You want some Highway code? "125 The speed limit is the absolute maximum and does not mean it is safe to drive at that speed irrespective of conditions. Driving at speeds too fast for the road and traffic conditions is dangerous. You should always reduce your speed when the road layout or condition presents hazards, such as bends sharing the road with pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders, particularly children, and motorcyclists weather conditions make it safer to do so driving at night as it is more difficult to see other road users." "126 Stopping Distances. Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear. You should" "146 Adapt your driving to the appropriate type and condition of road you are on. In particular do not treat speed limits as a target. It is often not appropriate or safe to drive at the maximum speed limit take the road and traffic conditions into account. Be prepared for unexpected or difficult situations, for example, the road being blocked beyond a blind bend. Be prepared to adjust your speed as a precaution"

How does this answer my point? You still have no reason to assume the above was true of this girl.

Score: -1

TigerTigerBurningBright says...1:23pm Sun 9 Feb 14

"How does this answer my point? You still have no reason to assume the above was true of this girl." There were not loads of cars crashing in the same place, were there? This was not a sudden sheet of black ice, or smoke from a stubble burning, this was a damaged road surface in an area with damaged road surfaces in an environment where damaged road surfaces are certainly in the public consciousness at a time of year when damaged road surfaces are more common on account of the weather. Do you actually understand the Highway Code?

"How does this answer my point? You still have no reason to assume the above was true of this girl."
There were not loads of cars crashing in the same place, were there?
This was not a sudden sheet of black ice, or smoke from a stubble burning, this was a damaged road surface in an area with damaged road surfaces in an environment where damaged road surfaces are certainly in the public consciousness at a time of year when damaged road surfaces are more common on account of the weather.
Do you actually understand the Highway Code?TigerTigerBurningBright

"How does this answer my point? You still have no reason to assume the above was true of this girl." There were not loads of cars crashing in the same place, were there? This was not a sudden sheet of black ice, or smoke from a stubble burning, this was a damaged road surface in an area with damaged road surfaces in an environment where damaged road surfaces are certainly in the public consciousness at a time of year when damaged road surfaces are more common on account of the weather. Do you actually understand the Highway Code?

Score: 5

TigerTigerBurningBright says...1:30pm Sun 9 Feb 14

"I made no claims and provided no source because it was merely to point out two specifics of VED. 1 This tax is unique, in that, it was originally designed to raise funds to build infrastructure (specifically roads) directly from its users; yes, the tax is now treated as part of the pot, but that wasn’t the point. 2 It’s also unique, in that, it still directly relates to roads “must be paid for most types of vehicle which are to be used (or parked) on the public roads” so if the roads disintegrate no tax to collect. The interconnectedness of this particular tax means it’s perfectly legitimate to argue the current infrastructure should be maintained from its proceeds." You partially quoted from Wiki to make your point. You were wrong. You could admit it, apologise and move on, but oh no! 1. All taxes are unique. What tax is not unique? 2. It doesn't relate to roads, it related to the levels of pollutant put out by motor vehicles. As for your last sentence, that's just tripe. Utter tripe. It is not perfectly legitimate to do that at all, even if you are attempting to win an unwinnable argument with mis-quotes and untruths.

"I made no claims and provided no source because it was merely to point out two specifics of VED.
1 This tax is unique, in that, it was originally designed to raise funds to build infrastructure (specifically roads) directly from its users; yes, the tax is now treated as part of the pot, but that wasn’t the point.
2 It’s also unique, in that, it still directly relates to roads “must be paid for most types of vehicle which are to be used (or parked) on the public roads” so if the roads disintegrate no tax to collect.
The interconnectedness of this particular tax means it’s perfectly legitimate to argue the current infrastructure should be maintained from its proceeds."
You partially quoted from Wiki to make your point. You were wrong. You could admit it, apologise and move on, but oh no!
1. All taxes are unique. What tax is not unique?
2. It doesn't relate to roads, it related to the levels of pollutant put out by motor vehicles.
As for your last sentence, that's just tripe. Utter tripe. It is not perfectly legitimate to do that at all, even if you are attempting to win an unwinnable argument with mis-quotes and untruths.TigerTigerBurningBright

"I made no claims and provided no source because it was merely to point out two specifics of VED. 1 This tax is unique, in that, it was originally designed to raise funds to build infrastructure (specifically roads) directly from its users; yes, the tax is now treated as part of the pot, but that wasn’t the point. 2 It’s also unique, in that, it still directly relates to roads “must be paid for most types of vehicle which are to be used (or parked) on the public roads” so if the roads disintegrate no tax to collect. The interconnectedness of this particular tax means it’s perfectly legitimate to argue the current infrastructure should be maintained from its proceeds." You partially quoted from Wiki to make your point. You were wrong. You could admit it, apologise and move on, but oh no! 1. All taxes are unique. What tax is not unique? 2. It doesn't relate to roads, it related to the levels of pollutant put out by motor vehicles. As for your last sentence, that's just tripe. Utter tripe. It is not perfectly legitimate to do that at all, even if you are attempting to win an unwinnable argument with mis-quotes and untruths.

Score: 1

dimreepr says...1:44pm Sun 9 Feb 14

FYI tiger, from here on I will only respond to legitimate reasoning and arguments (you started well enough); but not this endless unsupported, aggressive, insulting and mindless gainsay, its just troll like behaviour. So if you actually want to debate, great, otherwise what’s the point?

FYI tiger, from here on I will only respond to legitimate reasoning and arguments (you started well enough); but not this endless unsupported, aggressive, insulting and mindless gainsay, its just troll like behaviour. So if you actually want to debate, great, otherwise what’s the point?dimreepr

FYI tiger, from here on I will only respond to legitimate reasoning and arguments (you started well enough); but not this endless unsupported, aggressive, insulting and mindless gainsay, its just troll like behaviour. So if you actually want to debate, great, otherwise what’s the point?

Score: -4

TigerTigerBurningBright says...3:10pm Sun 9 Feb 14

dim, I'm pleased that you are reconsidering your troll behaviour.

dim, I'm pleased that you are reconsidering your troll behaviour.TigerTigerBurningBright

dim, I'm pleased that you are reconsidering your troll behaviour.

Score: 3

dimreepr says...3:27pm Sun 9 Feb 14

You’re just a bloviating buffoon.

You’re just a bloviating buffoon.dimreepr

You’re just a bloviating buffoon.

Score: -5

mdauncey says...6:32pm Sun 9 Feb 14

Christie If it was already marked why hadn,t it been fixed immediately as the council day it should have been. Get the inspection and repair records I bet they,re behind with all the rain etc now

Christie
If it was already marked why hadn,t it been fixed immediately as the council day it should have been.
Get the inspection and repair records I bet they,re behind with all the rain etc nowmdauncey

Christie If it was already marked why hadn,t it been fixed immediately as the council day it should have been. Get the inspection and repair records I bet they,re behind with all the rain etc now

Score: -3

Salendine says...7:59pm Sun 9 Feb 14

Methinks both of you protesteth too much. Now kiss and make up.

Methinks both of you protesteth too much. Now kiss and make up.Salendine

Methinks both of you protesteth too much. Now kiss and make up.

Score: 1

zer()cool says...10:21pm Sun 9 Feb 14

dimreepr wrote…

ALL of the above statements seem to put the blame for this ACCIDENT squarely on the shoulders of the victim and is a perfect example of assumption. The term ‘accident’ should be taken literally, in cases such as this, and blame should be apportioned to the ‘MOST’ responsible i.e. those responsible for highway maintenance, the motorist pays dearly for a basic infrastructure, one that should be trustworthy and not one that mimics a third world country.

there is no "ACCIDENT" when referring to road traffic collisions, it's always somebodies fault, hence the term for such incidents referred to by the police & emergency services, now as "road traffic collision/s" & for some years now. "Why do police no longer say or use the term 'Traffic Accident'? Because 'accident' implies there is nobody to blame" Yes we do all pay dearly for our use of motor vehicles, but...that has nothing to do with overcompensating on steering when trying to avoid a pothole, swerving over to the other side of the road, is pure driver error. I avoid potholes where I live all the time, & some are **** deep, but would never put other road users or passengers at risk by swerving to the other side of the road, you could say the pothole contributed to the collision, but it's plain to see what happened if the report is accurate, lucky she didn't hit another car injuring the occupants on the other side of the road TBH

[quote][p][bold]dimreepr[/bold] wrote:
ALL of the above statements seem to put the blame for this ACCIDENT squarely on the shoulders of the victim and is a perfect example of assumption. The term ‘accident’ should be taken literally, in cases such as this, and blame should be apportioned to the ‘MOST’ responsible i.e. those responsible for highway maintenance, the motorist pays dearly for a basic infrastructure, one that should be trustworthy and not one that mimics a third world country.[/p][/quote]there is no "ACCIDENT" when referring to road traffic collisions, it's always somebodies fault, hence the term for such incidents referred to by the police & emergency services, now as "road traffic collision/s" & for some years now.
"Why do police no longer say or use the term 'Traffic Accident'? Because 'accident' implies there is nobody to blame"
Yes we do all pay dearly for our use of motor vehicles, but...that has nothing to do with overcompensating on steering when trying to avoid a pothole, swerving over to the other side of the road, is pure driver error.
I avoid potholes where I live all the time, & some are **** deep, but would never put other road users or passengers at risk by swerving to the other side of the road, you could say the pothole contributed to the collision, but it's plain to see what happened if the report is accurate, lucky she didn't hit another car injuring the occupants on the other side of the road TBHzer()cool

dimreepr wrote…

ALL of the above statements seem to put the blame for this ACCIDENT squarely on the shoulders of the victim and is a perfect example of assumption. The term ‘accident’ should be taken literally, in cases such as this, and blame should be apportioned to the ‘MOST’ responsible i.e. those responsible for highway maintenance, the motorist pays dearly for a basic infrastructure, one that should be trustworthy and not one that mimics a third world country.

there is no "ACCIDENT" when referring to road traffic collisions, it's always somebodies fault, hence the term for such incidents referred to by the police & emergency services, now as "road traffic collision/s" & for some years now. "Why do police no longer say or use the term 'Traffic Accident'? Because 'accident' implies there is nobody to blame" Yes we do all pay dearly for our use of motor vehicles, but...that has nothing to do with overcompensating on steering when trying to avoid a pothole, swerving over to the other side of the road, is pure driver error. I avoid potholes where I live all the time, & some are **** deep, but would never put other road users or passengers at risk by swerving to the other side of the road, you could say the pothole contributed to the collision, but it's plain to see what happened if the report is accurate, lucky she didn't hit another car injuring the occupants on the other side of the road TBH

Score: 6

dimreepr says...9:24am Mon 10 Feb 14

It must be so reassuring to live in a straight forward monochromatic world in which nothing is accidental and blame can be apportioned whatever the circumstance; a world where inexperience and perception can play no part in any defence; then this girl clearly deserves her injuries. On the other hand maybe we should try, as a society, to have just a little more sympathy and take into account such things a psychology; for instance the ‘invisible gorilla’ studies (google it) in which expectation forms a huge part of what we actually see and not rely on some intransigent civil servant that uses hindsight to show what actions should have been taken. “The further a society drifts from the truth the more it will hate those who speak it” – George Orwell

It must be so reassuring to live in a straight forward monochromatic world in which nothing is accidental and blame can be apportioned whatever the circumstance; a world where inexperience and perception can play no part in any defence; then this girl clearly deserves her injuries.
On the other hand maybe we should try, as a society, to have just a little more sympathy and take into account such things a psychology; for instance the ‘invisible gorilla’ studies (google it) in which expectation forms a huge part of what we actually see and not rely on some intransigent civil servant that uses hindsight to show what actions should have been taken.
“The further a society drifts from the truth the more it will hate those who speak it” – George Orwelldimreepr

It must be so reassuring to live in a straight forward monochromatic world in which nothing is accidental and blame can be apportioned whatever the circumstance; a world where inexperience and perception can play no part in any defence; then this girl clearly deserves her injuries. On the other hand maybe we should try, as a society, to have just a little more sympathy and take into account such things a psychology; for instance the ‘invisible gorilla’ studies (google it) in which expectation forms a huge part of what we actually see and not rely on some intransigent civil servant that uses hindsight to show what actions should have been taken. “The further a society drifts from the truth the more it will hate those who speak it” – George Orwell

Score: -5

zer()cool says...12:06pm Mon 10 Feb 14

dimreepr wrote…

It must be so reassuring to live in a straight forward monochromatic world in which nothing is accidental and blame can be apportioned whatever the circumstance; a world where inexperience and perception can play no part in any defence; then this girl clearly deserves her injuries. On the other hand maybe we should try, as a society, to have just a little more sympathy and take into account such things a psychology; for instance the ‘invisible gorilla’ studies (google it) in which expectation forms a huge part of what we actually see and not rely on some intransigent civil servant that uses hindsight to show what actions should have been taken. “The further a society drifts from the truth the more it will hate those who speak it” – George Orwell

Dim...I think personally (& thats just my opinion) you spend too much time googling, & wiki'ing, maybe you should find more activities to try & fill out your day more productively & stop trolling comments in a local rag...you probably have already googled or wiki'd the precise term "trolling" although there is an art to "trolling" you already seem to be well on your way to earning yourself a big shiny badge for it....WELL DONE : ) As I do indeed live in a monochromatic world (not my choice) there is no grey area in this story, the pothole may have played a small part in what happened, but remember, there hasn't been 2 dozen reports of the same type of "ACCIDENT" happening this week, & probably won't be for the next few years, if at all. Inexperience is to blame for this, putting the blame on the council or the state of the roads is quite juvenile, when people make mistakes, they should just swallow their pride & admit to it, if people did this it would make the whole world a better place, there is no accountability these days, people are always looking for an excuse to put the blame on others...I am putting money on the girls Father or Mother who contacted the Standard about the story. Like I said earlier, I do hope she recovers quickly, it's a devastating experience to be in any road traffic collision, sometimes quite life changing, especially if the injuries require rehabilitation, but the young girl being hurt shouldn't cloud peoples judgement on why this really happened. Society is finished, unless you relent to the machine, you are the divide, Orwell said a lot of things, his last message was the most disturbing, & this is what society has become, his own nightmare.

[quote][p][bold]dimreepr[/bold] wrote:
It must be so reassuring to live in a straight forward monochromatic world in which nothing is accidental and blame can be apportioned whatever the circumstance; a world where inexperience and perception can play no part in any defence; then this girl clearly deserves her injuries.
On the other hand maybe we should try, as a society, to have just a little more sympathy and take into account such things a psychology; for instance the ‘invisible gorilla’ studies (google it) in which expectation forms a huge part of what we actually see and not rely on some intransigent civil servant that uses hindsight to show what actions should have been taken.
“The further a society drifts from the truth the more it will hate those who speak it” – George Orwell[/p][/quote]Dim...I think personally (& thats just my opinion) you spend too much time googling, & wiki'ing, maybe you should find more activities to try & fill out your day more productively & stop trolling comments in a local rag...you probably have already googled or wiki'd the precise term "trolling" although there is an art to "trolling" you already seem to be well on your way to earning yourself a big shiny badge for it....WELL DONE : )
As I do indeed live in a monochromatic world (not my choice) there is no grey area in this story, the pothole may have played a small part in what happened, but remember, there hasn't been 2 dozen reports of the same type of "ACCIDENT" happening this week, & probably won't be for the next few years, if at all.
Inexperience is to blame for this, putting the blame on the council or the state of the roads is quite juvenile, when people make mistakes, they should just swallow their pride & admit to it, if people did this it would make the whole world a better place, there is no accountability these days, people are always looking for an excuse to put the blame on others...I am putting money on the girls Father or Mother who contacted the Standard about the story.
Like I said earlier, I do hope she recovers quickly, it's a devastating experience to be in any road traffic collision, sometimes quite life changing, especially if the injuries require rehabilitation, but the young girl being hurt shouldn't cloud peoples judgement on why this really happened.
Society is finished, unless you relent to the machine, you are the divide, Orwell said a lot of things, his last message was the most disturbing, & this is what society has become, his own nightmare.zer()cool

dimreepr wrote…

It must be so reassuring to live in a straight forward monochromatic world in which nothing is accidental and blame can be apportioned whatever the circumstance; a world where inexperience and perception can play no part in any defence; then this girl clearly deserves her injuries. On the other hand maybe we should try, as a society, to have just a little more sympathy and take into account such things a psychology; for instance the ‘invisible gorilla’ studies (google it) in which expectation forms a huge part of what we actually see and not rely on some intransigent civil servant that uses hindsight to show what actions should have been taken. “The further a society drifts from the truth the more it will hate those who speak it” – George Orwell

Dim...I think personally (& thats just my opinion) you spend too much time googling, & wiki'ing, maybe you should find more activities to try & fill out your day more productively & stop trolling comments in a local rag...you probably have already googled or wiki'd the precise term "trolling" although there is an art to "trolling" you already seem to be well on your way to earning yourself a big shiny badge for it....WELL DONE : ) As I do indeed live in a monochromatic world (not my choice) there is no grey area in this story, the pothole may have played a small part in what happened, but remember, there hasn't been 2 dozen reports of the same type of "ACCIDENT" happening this week, & probably won't be for the next few years, if at all. Inexperience is to blame for this, putting the blame on the council or the state of the roads is quite juvenile, when people make mistakes, they should just swallow their pride & admit to it, if people did this it would make the whole world a better place, there is no accountability these days, people are always looking for an excuse to put the blame on others...I am putting money on the girls Father or Mother who contacted the Standard about the story. Like I said earlier, I do hope she recovers quickly, it's a devastating experience to be in any road traffic collision, sometimes quite life changing, especially if the injuries require rehabilitation, but the young girl being hurt shouldn't cloud peoples judgement on why this really happened. Society is finished, unless you relent to the machine, you are the divide, Orwell said a lot of things, his last message was the most disturbing, & this is what society has become, his own nightmare.

I reported these potholes to the council last November 2012., some of them have been there since 2010. So much for them being repaired in 28 days.

I reported these potholes to the council last November 2012., some of them have been there since 2010. So much for them being repaired in 28 days.Artwalks

I reported these potholes to the council last November 2012., some of them have been there since 2010. So much for them being repaired in 28 days.

Score: 0

GDW1982 says...12:37pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Does make me wonder however, what damage would she of caused if she hit said pot hole compared to swerving erratically around it. Wheel alignment out, damage to wheel / tyre maybe, suspension snap. Probably a lot less to what has been caused by crashing off the road. Not saying I don't have sympathy for her, since the Potholes as posted above has been there for years. We live in England for crying out loud, these sorts of road surfaces you would expect to see in the 3rd world countries. Why can't we follow Frances smooth roads.

Does make me wonder however, what damage would she of caused if she hit said pot hole compared to swerving erratically around it. Wheel alignment out, damage to wheel / tyre maybe, suspension snap. Probably a lot less to what has been caused by crashing off the road.
Not saying I don't have sympathy for her, since the Potholes as posted above has been there for years. We live in England for crying out loud, these sorts of road surfaces you would expect to see in the 3rd world countries. Why can't we follow Frances smooth roads.GDW1982

Does make me wonder however, what damage would she of caused if she hit said pot hole compared to swerving erratically around it. Wheel alignment out, damage to wheel / tyre maybe, suspension snap. Probably a lot less to what has been caused by crashing off the road. Not saying I don't have sympathy for her, since the Potholes as posted above has been there for years. We live in England for crying out loud, these sorts of road surfaces you would expect to see in the 3rd world countries. Why can't we follow Frances smooth roads.

Score: -3

GDW1982 says...12:40pm Tue 11 Feb 14

A GCC spokesman said: “Our sympathies are with the driver involved in this accident. Our busiest roads like the A4173 are inspected at least every month and across the county our priority is to fix unsafe potholes immediately, while smaller potholes are programmed to be repaired within 28 days – in line with the national guidelines.” Well you need to find yourself a new team then, because they clearly aren't doing a great job.

A GCC spokesman said: “Our sympathies are with the driver involved in this accident. Our busiest roads like the A4173 are inspected at least every month and across the county our priority is to fix unsafe potholes immediately, while smaller potholes are programmed to be repaired within 28 days – in line with the national guidelines.”
Well you need to find yourself a new team then, because they clearly aren't doing a great job.GDW1982

A GCC spokesman said: “Our sympathies are with the driver involved in this accident. Our busiest roads like the A4173 are inspected at least every month and across the county our priority is to fix unsafe potholes immediately, while smaller potholes are programmed to be repaired within 28 days – in line with the national guidelines.” Well you need to find yourself a new team then, because they clearly aren't doing a great job.

Score: -3

BigBoy22 says...1:49pm Tue 11 Feb 14

GDW1982 wrote…

Does make me wonder however, what damage would she of caused if she hit said pot hole compared to swerving erratically around it. Wheel alignment out, damage to wheel / tyre maybe, suspension snap. Probably a lot less to what has been caused by crashing off the road. Not saying I don't have sympathy for her, since the Potholes as posted above has been there for years. We live in England for crying out loud, these sorts of road surfaces you would expect to see in the 3rd world countries. Why can't we follow Frances smooth roads.

You can have lovely smooth roads like (some of) France has. All you need to do is pay tax at the same level as them and road tolls on top.

[quote][p][bold]GDW1982[/bold] wrote:
Does make me wonder however, what damage would she of caused if she hit said pot hole compared to swerving erratically around it. Wheel alignment out, damage to wheel / tyre maybe, suspension snap. Probably a lot less to what has been caused by crashing off the road.
Not saying I don't have sympathy for her, since the Potholes as posted above has been there for years. We live in England for crying out loud, these sorts of road surfaces you would expect to see in the 3rd world countries. Why can't we follow Frances smooth roads.[/p][/quote]You can have lovely smooth roads like (some of) France has. All you need to do is pay tax at the same level as them and road tolls on top.BigBoy22

GDW1982 wrote…

Does make me wonder however, what damage would she of caused if she hit said pot hole compared to swerving erratically around it. Wheel alignment out, damage to wheel / tyre maybe, suspension snap. Probably a lot less to what has been caused by crashing off the road. Not saying I don't have sympathy for her, since the Potholes as posted above has been there for years. We live in England for crying out loud, these sorts of road surfaces you would expect to see in the 3rd world countries. Why can't we follow Frances smooth roads.

You can have lovely smooth roads like (some of) France has. All you need to do is pay tax at the same level as them and road tolls on top.

Dim...It's funny...being as self righteous as you really are, you have quite clearly made a fool of yourself again, somebody simply disagreeing with your opinion does not necessarily make them your preferred nemesis :D

[quote][p][bold]dimreepr[/bold] wrote:
Nice try tiger but conjecture doesn’t equal fact however black and white you’re world.[/p][/quote]Dim...It's funny...being as self righteous as you really are, you have quite clearly made a fool of yourself again, somebody simply disagreeing with your opinion does not necessarily make them your preferred nemesis :Dzer()cool

Dim...It's funny...being as self righteous as you really are, you have quite clearly made a fool of yourself again, somebody simply disagreeing with your opinion does not necessarily make them your preferred nemesis :D

Score: 6

zer()cool says...1:12am Wed 12 Feb 14

GDW1982 wrote…

Does make me wonder however, what damage would she of caused if she hit said pot hole compared to swerving erratically around it. Wheel alignment out, damage to wheel / tyre maybe, suspension snap. Probably a lot less to what has been caused by crashing off the road. Not saying I don't have sympathy for her, since the Potholes as posted above has been there for years. We live in England for crying out loud, these sorts of road surfaces you would expect to see in the 3rd world countries. Why can't we follow Frances smooth roads.

what is a suspension snap?, if you are going into technical detail trying to prove a point, at least be elaborate about the detail...lol GDW1982 wrote: "Well you need to find yourself a new team then, because they clearly aren't doing a great job" what a juvenile comment...I'm sure the guys working fixing the potholes are doing a great job, in fact why blame them when quite often it's upper management that is the problem prioritising the jobs geographically, I see nobody congratulating them for doing a great job, wind, rain, or shine, would you want to be out in this horrendous weather freezing your pink parts off?...what should we do put them on the same hit list as Traffic wardens? road maintenance guys do a great job when allowed. The simple fact is the Standard is using this girls inexperienced driving & poor evasive manoeuvres to drive home the political message...*sigh*...a s usual to pitch an audience for moral BS I'm sure if you wanted to drive on the compressed mud of some third world countries, you would see you are not that hard done by, also if you owned a working vehicle in a third world country, you would probably be in the minority Why does everybody when attempting to make a point, have to do the British thing & try & be funny in such a dramatic & overemphasised manner.

[quote][p][bold]GDW1982[/bold] wrote:
Does make me wonder however, what damage would she of caused if she hit said pot hole compared to swerving erratically around it. Wheel alignment out, damage to wheel / tyre maybe, suspension snap. Probably a lot less to what has been caused by crashing off the road.
Not saying I don't have sympathy for her, since the Potholes as posted above has been there for years. We live in England for crying out loud, these sorts of road surfaces you would expect to see in the 3rd world countries. Why can't we follow Frances smooth roads.[/p][/quote]what is a suspension snap?, if you are going into technical detail trying to prove a point, at least be elaborate about the detail...lol
GDW1982 wrote: "Well you need to find yourself a new team then, because they clearly aren't doing a great job"
what a juvenile comment...I'm sure the guys working fixing the potholes are doing a great job, in fact why blame them when quite often it's upper management that is the problem prioritising the jobs geographically, I see nobody congratulating them for doing a great job, wind, rain, or shine, would you want to be out in this horrendous weather freezing your pink parts off?...what should we do put them on the same hit list as Traffic wardens? road maintenance guys do a great job when allowed.
The simple fact is the Standard is using this girls inexperienced driving & poor evasive manoeuvres to drive home the political message...*sigh*...a
s usual to pitch an audience for moral BS
I'm sure if you wanted to drive on the compressed mud of some third world countries, you would see you are not that hard done by, also if you owned a working vehicle in a third world country, you would probably be in the minority
Why does everybody when attempting to make a point, have to do the British thing & try & be funny in such a dramatic & overemphasised manner.zer()cool

GDW1982 wrote…

Does make me wonder however, what damage would she of caused if she hit said pot hole compared to swerving erratically around it. Wheel alignment out, damage to wheel / tyre maybe, suspension snap. Probably a lot less to what has been caused by crashing off the road. Not saying I don't have sympathy for her, since the Potholes as posted above has been there for years. We live in England for crying out loud, these sorts of road surfaces you would expect to see in the 3rd world countries. Why can't we follow Frances smooth roads.

what is a suspension snap?, if you are going into technical detail trying to prove a point, at least be elaborate about the detail...lol GDW1982 wrote: "Well you need to find yourself a new team then, because they clearly aren't doing a great job" what a juvenile comment...I'm sure the guys working fixing the potholes are doing a great job, in fact why blame them when quite often it's upper management that is the problem prioritising the jobs geographically, I see nobody congratulating them for doing a great job, wind, rain, or shine, would you want to be out in this horrendous weather freezing your pink parts off?...what should we do put them on the same hit list as Traffic wardens? road maintenance guys do a great job when allowed. The simple fact is the Standard is using this girls inexperienced driving & poor evasive manoeuvres to drive home the political message...*sigh*...a s usual to pitch an audience for moral BS I'm sure if you wanted to drive on the compressed mud of some third world countries, you would see you are not that hard done by, also if you owned a working vehicle in a third world country, you would probably be in the minority Why does everybody when attempting to make a point, have to do the British thing & try & be funny in such a dramatic & overemphasised manner.

Dim...It's funny...being as self righteous as you really are, you have quite clearly made a fool of yourself again, somebody simply disagreeing with your opinion does not necessarily make them your preferred nemesis :D

You’re quite right ‘it aint necessarily so’, but my familiarity with the laws of large numbers and probability coupled with the following reasons: Same mindless gainsaying style, same aggression, same insults, same lack of supportable content, same unreasonable demands for detail or evidence and to top it all the same total lack of any sense of irony. And given tigers history and his/her sudden, inexplicable, withdrawal; the only conclusions possible are either sock puppet or you’ve both had the same lessons in ‘the art of gainsay’ and you’ve both had an irony by-pass. Also neither you/tiger are preferred or a nemesis.

[quote][p][bold]zer()cool[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]dimreepr[/bold] wrote:
Nice try tiger but conjecture doesn’t equal fact however black and white you’re world.[/p][/quote]Dim...It's funny...being as self righteous as you really are, you have quite clearly made a fool of yourself again, somebody simply disagreeing with your opinion does not necessarily make them your preferred nemesis :D[/p][/quote]You’re quite right ‘it aint necessarily so’, but my familiarity with the laws of large numbers and probability coupled with the following reasons:
Same mindless gainsaying style, same aggression, same insults, same lack of supportable content, same unreasonable demands for detail or evidence and to top it all the same total lack of any sense of irony.
And given tigers history and his/her sudden, inexplicable, withdrawal; the only conclusions possible are either sock puppet or you’ve both had the same lessons in ‘the art of gainsay’ and you’ve both had an irony by-pass.
Also neither you/tiger are preferred or a nemesis.dimreepr

Dim...It's funny...being as self righteous as you really are, you have quite clearly made a fool of yourself again, somebody simply disagreeing with your opinion does not necessarily make them your preferred nemesis :D

You’re quite right ‘it aint necessarily so’, but my familiarity with the laws of large numbers and probability coupled with the following reasons: Same mindless gainsaying style, same aggression, same insults, same lack of supportable content, same unreasonable demands for detail or evidence and to top it all the same total lack of any sense of irony. And given tigers history and his/her sudden, inexplicable, withdrawal; the only conclusions possible are either sock puppet or you’ve both had the same lessons in ‘the art of gainsay’ and you’ve both had an irony by-pass. Also neither you/tiger are preferred or a nemesis.

Score: -6

TigerTigerBurningBright says...2:28pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Same relentless drivel from dim. "my familiarity with the laws of large numbers and probability" What on earth does that mean? What exactly is the probability that I am the same person as zer()cool? What large numbers are you talking about? "same lack of supportable content, same unreasonable demands for detail or evidence" Do you mean supportable content like selectively quoted chunks from Wikipedia? Are 'unreasonable demands for details or evidence" those where you have no answer? Earlier on on this comments page you said your were going to stop trolling. Will you stand by your word?

Same relentless drivel from dim.
"my familiarity with the laws of large numbers and probability"
What on earth does that mean? What exactly is the probability that I am the same person as zer()cool? What large numbers are you talking about?
"same lack of supportable content, same unreasonable demands for detail or evidence"
Do you mean supportable content like selectively quoted chunks from Wikipedia?
Are 'unreasonable demands for details or evidence" those where you have no answer?
Earlier on on this comments page you said your were going to stop trolling. Will you stand by your word?TigerTigerBurningBright

Same relentless drivel from dim. "my familiarity with the laws of large numbers and probability" What on earth does that mean? What exactly is the probability that I am the same person as zer()cool? What large numbers are you talking about? "same lack of supportable content, same unreasonable demands for detail or evidence" Do you mean supportable content like selectively quoted chunks from Wikipedia? Are 'unreasonable demands for details or evidence" those where you have no answer? Earlier on on this comments page you said your were going to stop trolling. Will you stand by your word?

Score: 6

dimreepr says...4:23pm Wed 12 Feb 14

I don't know what your problem is, but I bet it's hard to pronounce.

I don't know what your problem is, but I bet it's hard to pronounce.dimreepr

I don't know what your problem is, but I bet it's hard to pronounce.

Score: -4

zer()cool says...4:31pm Wed 12 Feb 14

TigerTigerBurningBri ght wrote…

Same relentless drivel from dim. "my familiarity with the laws of large numbers and probability" What on earth does that mean? What exactly is the probability that I am the same person as zer()cool? What large numbers are you talking about? "same lack of supportable content, same unreasonable demands for detail or evidence" Do you mean supportable content like selectively quoted chunks from Wikipedia? Are 'unreasonable demands for details or evidence" those where you have no answer? Earlier on on this comments page you said your were going to stop trolling. Will you stand by your word?

I think I might leave this debate, Dim is starting to sound incomprehensible, I enjoy some intelligence when debating, not endless quotes from Wiki, & the like. I could go there myself, the quotes Dim uses are a mish-mash only He/She can decipher, or make anything legible of, the used qoutes don't really seem appropriate in some of your posts. Which makes me think someone has questioned your grasp of the English language, or indeed you feel inadequate deep down, & are just simply orchestrating a failed attempt to flex your grey muscles, to make yourself seem more elite than the rest of the posters here, or indeed an attempt to make others seem inadequate...FAIL!!! Dim, I expect somebody else would like to use the computer on the ward, so I won't monopolise anymore of your time :D

[quote][p][bold]TigerTigerBurningBri
ght[/bold] wrote:
Same relentless drivel from dim.
"my familiarity with the laws of large numbers and probability"
What on earth does that mean? What exactly is the probability that I am the same person as zer()cool? What large numbers are you talking about?
"same lack of supportable content, same unreasonable demands for detail or evidence"
Do you mean supportable content like selectively quoted chunks from Wikipedia?
Are 'unreasonable demands for details or evidence" those where you have no answer?
Earlier on on this comments page you said your were going to stop trolling. Will you stand by your word?[/p][/quote]I think I might leave this debate, Dim is starting to sound incomprehensible, I enjoy some intelligence when debating, not endless quotes from Wiki, & the like.
I could go there myself, the quotes Dim uses are a mish-mash only He/She can decipher, or make anything legible of, the used qoutes don't really seem appropriate in some of your posts.
Which makes me think someone has questioned your grasp of the English language, or indeed you feel inadequate deep down, & are just simply orchestrating a failed attempt to flex your grey muscles, to make yourself seem more elite than the rest of the posters here, or indeed an attempt to make others seem inadequate...FAIL!!!
Dim, I expect somebody else would like to use the computer on the ward, so I won't monopolise anymore of your time :Dzer()cool

TigerTigerBurningBri ght wrote…

Same relentless drivel from dim. "my familiarity with the laws of large numbers and probability" What on earth does that mean? What exactly is the probability that I am the same person as zer()cool? What large numbers are you talking about? "same lack of supportable content, same unreasonable demands for detail or evidence" Do you mean supportable content like selectively quoted chunks from Wikipedia? Are 'unreasonable demands for details or evidence" those where you have no answer? Earlier on on this comments page you said your were going to stop trolling. Will you stand by your word?

I think I might leave this debate, Dim is starting to sound incomprehensible, I enjoy some intelligence when debating, not endless quotes from Wiki, & the like. I could go there myself, the quotes Dim uses are a mish-mash only He/She can decipher, or make anything legible of, the used qoutes don't really seem appropriate in some of your posts. Which makes me think someone has questioned your grasp of the English language, or indeed you feel inadequate deep down, & are just simply orchestrating a failed attempt to flex your grey muscles, to make yourself seem more elite than the rest of the posters here, or indeed an attempt to make others seem inadequate...FAIL!!! Dim, I expect somebody else would like to use the computer on the ward, so I won't monopolise anymore of your time :D

Score: 4

dimreepr says...5:06pm Wed 12 Feb 14

And with that comment, tiger, I have a new appreciation of: “I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it." George Bernard Shaw

And with that comment, tiger, I have a new appreciation of:
“I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."
George Bernard Shawdimreepr

And with that comment, tiger, I have a new appreciation of: “I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it." George Bernard Shaw

Score: -6

TigerTigerBurningBright says...7:29pm Wed 12 Feb 14

"And with that comment, tiger, I have a new appreciation of: “I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it." George Bernard Shaw" And yet again, dim finds something on the internet and posts it proudly, like a puppy with a next door neighbour's used nappy.

"And with that comment, tiger, I have a new appreciation of:
“I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."
George Bernard Shaw"
And yet again, dim finds something on the internet and posts it proudly, like a puppy with a next door neighbour's used nappy.TigerTigerBurningBright

"And with that comment, tiger, I have a new appreciation of: “I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it." George Bernard Shaw" And yet again, dim finds something on the internet and posts it proudly, like a puppy with a next door neighbour's used nappy.

Ipsoregulated

This website and associated newspapers adhere to the Independent Press Standardards Organisations's Editors' Code of Practice. If you have a compaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then please contact the editor here. If you are dissatisfied with the response provided you can contact IPSO here